Beutel v. Beutel
Cases that cite this one
75 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. 21st Century Constr. Corp. (New York Supreme Court 2018)
- Morad v. Morad (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- Brennan v. Brennan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
- Gaton v. Gaton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- Stacom v. Wunsch (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- Capone v. Capone (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Chalos v. Chalos (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
- Van Wie v. Van Wie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Weinstein v. Weinstein (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Surlak v. Surlak (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1983)
- Nagi v. Ahmed (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Seton Health at Schuyler Ridge Residential Health Care v. Dziuba (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Wolman v. Shouela (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Wolman v. Shouela (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Weiss v. Weiss (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Weiss v. Weiss (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Rio v. Rio (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Kessler v. Kessler (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- Morpurgo v. Morpurgo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- Weissman v. Weissman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- Cosh v. Cosh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- Scarfone v. Village of Ossining (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Morand v. Morand (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Fixler v. Fixler (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
- Lyons v. Lyons (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Plaintiff’s pleading and the papers submitted in its support cannot be said to set forth a legal basis for finding that defendant procured the separation agreement by duress. As alleged in the complaint, plaintiff was under emotional strain during the several months that the agreement was being drafted. During this entire period, however, plaintiff was represented by an attorney who undertook the actual negotiations. Implicitly, plaintiff’s attorney also approved the terms of the agreement and there is no contrary showing. Plaintiff signed the agreement at her attorney’s office, in her attorney’s presence, and several days before defendant signed the agreement at his attorney’s office. Even accepting plaintiff’s allegation that defendant persistently telephoned her to urge that she sign the agreement, the circumstances described in the complaint do not constitute duress.
Nor does the complaint state a cause of action to rescind on the ground of incapacity to contract. Even if the complaint could be read to allege incapacity, nothing in the complaint or the affidavits suggests that plaintiff’s claimed incapacity continued through the two years during which the contract was effective and fully performed by defendant, and the benefits received by plaintiff. Under such circumstances, plaintiff must be deemed to have ratified the agreement (cf. Sternlieb v Normandie Nat. Securities Corp., 263 NY 245, 247-248; Smith v Ryan, 191 NY 452, 458; Soviero Bros. Contr. Corp. v City of New York, 286 App Div 435, affd 2 NY2d 924).
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Jones taking no part.
Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.